| 1 |
On 02/01/19 07:47, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: |
| 2 |
>> |
| 3 |
>> I don't see anything in glep 76 about requiring verification of the |
| 4 |
>> signatures. It's my view (as trustee) that assertation by the signer |
| 5 |
>> that 'this is my signature' is sufficient. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> ^ This. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> It's not our business to check IDs, and it's not our business to stalk people |
| 10 |
> on google or facebook. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
True, even according to GLEP 76. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
> Now if someone says "Here's my name, and actually it is a fake name", then |
| 15 |
> that is a reason to refuse commit rights or patch acceptance, and probably ask |
| 16 |
> for some sort of verification when another name is then given. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
False, though that falsehood drove acceptance of GLEP 76. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> (That behaviour is roughly as intelligent as walking up to the security guy at |
| 21 |
> the airport and claiming loudly "I have a bomb in my luggage.") |
| 22 |
> As with your previous assertion, this is false, it is also pointlessly |
| 23 |
hyperbolic. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> Apart from that, I dont think we should care. |
| 26 |
> |
Archives